A meta-analysis was conducted to examine whether the predictors of recidivism for mentally disordered offenders are different from the predictors for nondisordered offenders. Effect sizes were calculated for 35 predictors of general recidivism and 27 predictors of violent recidivism drawn from 64 unique samples. The results showed that the major predictors of recidivism were the same for mentally disordered offenders as for nondisordered offenders. Criminal history variables were the best predictors, and clinical variables showed the smallest effect sizes. The findings suggest that the risk assessment of mentally disordered offenders can be enhanced with more attention to the social psychological criminological literature and less reliance on models of psychopathology.

A meta-analysis was conducted on 39 studies that generated 695 correlations with prison misconducts. Predictors of prison misconducts were grouped into 16 domains as follows: (a) personal characteristics ( n = 9), (b) situational factors ( n = 3), and (c) actuarial measures of antisocial personality and risk ( n = 4). Personal and situational variables were similar in their ability to predict prison misconduct. Within these two categories, antisocial attitudes and behavior (e.g., companions, prison adjustment), criminal history, and institutional factors were the strongest predictors. Among actuarial measures, an interview-based risk protocol produced the highest correlations with prison misconducts. The prediction of violent misconducts was associated with greater effect sizes than nonviolent misconducts. Despite the limitations of the database, several recommendations for assessing prison misconducts appear warranted.

Canadian public health officials responded to the unprecedented global outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by invoking public health measures ranging from extreme (e.g., quarantine) to lighter (e.g., social distancing) measures. Although necessary to mitigate disease spread, the psychological impact of social distancing and isolation is unknown (Wang et al., 2020). The impetus of this study were calls for research to compare the psychological effects of extreme and lighter measures (see Brooks et al., 2020), and our purpose was to examine the impact of COVID-19 on psychological distress to determine whether negative effects were present during the initial stages of social distancing/isolation measures. In this study, questionnaire data measuring satisfaction with life, social cohesion, psychological distress, and perceptions of risk was collected from 1381 Canadians during the early days of intense public health measures (31 March through 15 April 2020). Results suggest that even short-term social distancing practices are associated with increased psychological distress, including elevated levels of overall distress, such as panic, emotional disturbances, and depression. These results are noteworthy for several reasons: the timing of the distress, the population under investigation, and the fact that the applied mitigation was “lighter” than full quarantines previously studied. These findings suggest that after only a short period of time, less restrictive public health measures can lead to psychological distress. These results have major significance for government officials in future public health crisis as they judiciously weigh the costs and benefits of applying such measures with various public health guidelines discussed.

Using a sample of 497 Canadian women released into the community from federal prisons, this study examined the extent to which seven dynamic risk factors prospectively assessed at 6-month intervals (four waves) change over time and predict recidivism. Results obtained from a series of within-subject ANOVAs indicate that with the exception of substance abuse, all dynamic risk factors (i.e., employment, marital/family, community functioning, personal/emotional, criminal associates, and criminal attitudes) decreased among those offenders who did not recidivate. In addition, results obtained from a series of Cox regression survival analyses with time-dependent covariates also indicate that proximal assessments of dynamic risk predict recidivism more strongly than more distal assessments of dynamic risk. Employment and associates were the strongest dynamic predictors of recidivism, whereas the remaining factors were weak-to-moderate predictors of recidivism. This study lends support to the utility of repeatedly assessing dynamic risk factors among female offender populations.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare systems have been under extreme levels of stress due to increases in patient distress and patient deaths. While additional research and public health funding initiatives can alleviate these systemic issues, it is also important to consider the ongoing mental health and well-being of professionals working in healthcare. By surveying healthcare workers working in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic, we found that there was an elevated level of depressive symptomatology in that population. We also found that when employees were provided with accurate and timely information about the pandemic, and additional protective measures in the workplace, they were less likely to report negative effects on well-being. We recommend that healthcare employers take these steps, as well as providing targeted mental health interventions, in order to maintain the mental health of their employees, which in turn will provide better healthcare at the population level.